Use the Back button in your browser to see the other results of your search or to select another record.

Detailed Search Results

Comparison of incremental vestibulo-ocular reflex adaptation training versus x1 training in patients with chronic peripheral vestibular hypofunction: a two-year randomized controlled trial
Rinaudo CN, Schubert MC, Cremer PD, Figtree WVC, Todd CJ, Migliaccio AA
Journal of Neurologic Physical Therapy 2021 Oct;45(4):246-258
clinical trial
6/10 [Eligibility criteria: Yes; Random allocation: Yes; Concealed allocation: Yes; Baseline comparability: Yes; Blind subjects: No; Blind therapists: No; Blind assessors: Yes; Adequate follow-up: No; Intention-to-treat analysis: No; Between-group comparisons: Yes; Point estimates and variability: Yes. Note: Eligibility criteria item does not contribute to total score] *This score has been confirmed*

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: A crossover, double-blinded randomized controlled trial to investigate once-daily incremental vestibulo-ocular reflex (VOR) adaptation (IVA) training over 2 years in people with stable and chronic peripheral vestibular hypofunction. METHODS: Twenty-one patients with peripheral vestibular hypofunction were randomly assigned to intervention-then-control (n = 12) or control-then-intervention (n = 9) groups. The task consisted of either x1 (control) or IVA training, once daily every day for 15 minutes over 6-months, followed by a 6-month washout, then repeated for arm 2 of the crossover. Primary outcome: vestibulo-ocular reflex gain. Secondary outcomes: compensatory saccades, dynamic visual acuity, static balance, gait, and subjective symptoms. Multiple imputation was used for missing data. Between-group differences were analyzed using a linear mixed model with repeated measures. RESULTS: On average patients trained once daily 4 days per week. IVA training resulted in significantly larger VOR gain increase (active 20.6% +/- 12.08%, p = 0.006; passive 30.6% +/- 25.45%, p = 0.016) compared with x1 training (active -2.4% +/- 12.88%, p = 0.99; passive -0.6% +/- 15.31%, p = 0.68) (p < 0.001). The increased IVA gain did not significantly reduce with approximately 27% persisting over the washout period. x1 training resulted in greater reduction of compensatory saccade latency (p = 0.04) and increase in amplitude (p = 0.02) compared with IVA training. There was no difference between groups in gait and balance measures; however, only the IVA group had improved total Dizziness Handicap Inventory (p = 0.006). DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest IVA improves VOR gain and reduces perception of disability more than conventional x1 training. We suggest at least 4 weeks of once-daily 4 days-per-week IVA training should be part of a comprehensive vestibular rehabilitation program.

Full text (sometimes free) may be available at these link(s):      help